Ohio Supreme Court, 1961

Austin v. Sacks

Austin v. Sacks
Ohio Supreme Court · Decided May 31, 1961 · Bell, Fourth, Herbert, Matthias, Neill, Place, Radcliff, Stead, Taft, Weygandt, Zimmerman
172 Ohio St. (N.S.) 292

Austin v. Sacks

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam.

Petitioner had an adequate remedy by way of appeal from the judgment of conviction and sentence to review the alleged errors and irregularities of which he here complains and cannot now have such a review by a proceeding in habeas corpus.

Petitioner rema/nded to custody.

Weygandt, C. J., Zimmerman, Taft, Matthias, Bell, Radcliff and O’Neill, JJ., concur. Radcliff, J., of the Fourth Appellate District, sitting by designation in the place and stead of Herbert,' J.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.